Keith Burgess-Jackson, J.D., Ph.D.

We must have Border Security, get rid of Chain, Lottery, Catch & Release Sanctuary Cities – go to Merit based Immigration. Protect ICE and Law Enforcement and, of course, keep building, but much faster, THE WALL!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 30, 2018

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

Lou Reed Live (1975).

Here are highlights from Stage 21 of the Tour de France. Geraint Thomas becomes the first Welshman to win the Tour. For the sake of the sport, I hope he's clean.

Here.

Here.

Screen shot, Tour de France. Click to enlarge.

This woman is clueless. She writes:

Why am I telling Jane’s story now? The lack of legal and safe abortion before the Roe v. Wade decision of 1973 killed and maimed thousands of young women. Should that decision be overturned and abortion again become illegal, there will be countless more young women like Jane.

Let's think this through. If Roe v. Wade (1973) is overruled by the Supreme Court, then states (i.e., the citizens of each state, acting in and through the democratic process) will be able to regulate (and even prohibit) abortion. "Be able to." What will they do? Probably at least half of them will allow abortion up to viability, and some may allow it beyond that point if the woman's health calls for it. The more radical states (e.g., Massachusetts and California) might allow it until the point of birth. Will there be states that ban abortion? I'm sure there will be; but women in these states can travel to other states to terminate their pregnancies. Is this a burden? I'm sure it will be; but there are individuals and organizations (such as NARAL and Planned Parenthood) that can and will pick up the tab.

The author, a doctor, has no legal expertise. She appears not to know what Roe v. Wade did or what would or will happen if it is overruled. Her short essay appears to be designed to confuse and frighten women, which, if true, is despicable. Prior to 1973, there may have been no states that allowed abortion, so women who had unwanted pregnancies were in a bind. This is not the case today, and won't be if Roe is overruled.

If I may add another criticism of the essay, the author says that "Five years later [i.e., in 1973, after Roe was decided], Jane would not have died." How does she know that? Jane may have died even with the best medical care that was available. She was very sick, after all, and she was seven months pregnant. The lesson here is that you should pick your examples carefully.

A final thought: However burdensome it may have been for poor Jane not to be able to get a "legal" abortion, it was far worse for her unborn baby to be killed, and doubly bad to be killed by his or her mother, and triply bad to be killed by his or her mother for reasons of convenience. (Jane, we're told, wasn't "ready" to be a mother and wanted to "continue her training [to] become a nurse." She planned to have other children "later.") One wonders why the author didn't so much as mention the baby.

Defying all economic logic and apparently oblivious to their inglorious history, President Donald Trump put in place a set of tariffs. These tariffs will have the predictable effect of harming virtually all consumers while aiding a very select few—those whose support he so blatantly sought at all of our expense.

Now, as the chickens come home to roost, Trump wants to give farmers billions of “emergency” aid, trying to make up for the damage done to them by his ill-conceived, politically motivated tariff policies. Perhaps the farmers will be made whole (or not), but what about the rest of us who will not only continue to suffer the restricted supply, high prices and economic dislocation of his assault on free trade, but will also, as taxpayers, foot the bill for the payments to the farmers?

Doesn’t Trump owe all of us—not just the farmers—reparations for the mess he has caused and he is causing? After all, if he is as wealthy as he claims, he can afford it, and it would seem consistent with Trump’s litigious nature that we sue him for compensation.

— William P. Gottschalk, Lake Forest

I would be willing to “shut down” government if the Democrats do not give us the votes for Border Security, which includes the Wall! Must get rid of Lottery, Catch & Release etc. and finally go to system of Immigration based on MERIT! We need great people coming into our Country!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 29, 2018

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

Here.